6 ms·

HN is very tone-sensitive; I pretty frequently see comments that are correct (sometimes even by people who are extremely expert in the topic) that get downvoted

by dilap 6y ago

HN is very tone-sensitive; I pretty frequently see comments that are correct (sometimes even by people who are extremely expert in the topic) that get downvoted because they're stated in a blunt or impolite way.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
IMO it's more nuanced. If you're endorsing something the majority here likes you don't really have to care about tone as long as you're not being totally crazy. If you're trying to go against the grain then you need to chose your words very carefully. Edit: Of course the real world is like this too but I think there's a meaningful difference in the degree.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  Frankly, I consider us lucky to have a place where it's only as bad as you've described, since at this point you're getting down to borderline unavoidable qualities of human communication. In most other communities, there are no carefully chosen words, and downvotes/disagreements are primarily petty, rather than attempts to address pettiness.
- tutfbhuf 6y ago
  Like in the real world.
  - Loughla 6y ago
    Except it's not that simple - - the difference is that, in the real world, there are no scores associated with your negativity or 'going against the grain'. You can disagree in whatever manner you want, as long as you are oblivious to the obvious social cues of the people around you. Whereas on HN, there is a score to tell you that you've committed a social faux pas. It's more immediate, so it's a little easier to figure out. I've often thought about ways to integrate the scoring feature into real life to help folks on the spectrum learn to communicate with neurotypicals. Haven't squirreled that one out yet.
    - the_af 6y ago
      What's worse, with visual cues that you've commited a faux pas (the graying out), people are inclined to jump on the bandwagon. There is a subconscious temptation to pile on. In real life, you're not grayed-out for being contrary.
      - dwaltrip 6y ago
        I'm not sure if the graying out is the best approach. However, in real life, people may look at you funny, and if they do, others will notice this. Tangentially, the lack of body language feedback is a major reason people are such assholes online. It doesn't exactly feel like you are talking to a real person and you aren't getting realtime feedback, so it is harder to adjust to the other person or even just treat them reasonably.
        the_af 6y ago
        Agreed. I find downvote visual cues such as the graying out a bit like laugh tracks in sitcoms. On their own, some people will find the jokes funny, some find them distasteful or unfunny -- add a laugh track and you're telling people how they must feel. Downvotes are a lot like that: "people find this comment distasteful, what are you going to do about that?".
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jeffbee 6y ago
There is nothing wrong with the tone of Person1. Every aspect of their statement is true and correct, not exaggerated, and gives due respect to both the OP and the reader of the comment.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  To provide you another point of view: I can not tell if they are being snarky/sarcastic, or if they are being literal.
- dilap 6y ago
  I agree, it's simply blunt. But if they had said something like, "I suspect this post is written by GPT-3. Consider X, Y, Z sentence -- these are typical constructions of GPT-3 because of A," it probably would not have been down-voted.
  - jeffbee 6y ago
    I guess. That an asymmetrical expectation, though. If we require a great effort to politely point out that a blog is devoid of substance, the spammers win. It's also a very important skill these days to understand when you are being manipulated by the tone police into supporting an extreme position, or at least not denouncing it. It's super easy to lure some HNer into espousing an essentially eugenicist position on race and IQ, which weirdly is a topic that always makes it to the front page on HN, but then if you go on to denounce their position as eugenicist, you'll be flagged. I think that inevitably leads to decline in the quality of a community because if you don't have shorthand for "this is autogenerated spam", "this is climate denial", "this is a conspiracy theory", or "this is racist" then you'll instead waste all of your time trying to politely refute the bullshit point by point.
    - hackinthebochs 6y ago
      >If we require a great effort to politely point out that a blog is devoid of substance, the spammers win. But until spam becomes a problem on this site, it is premature to alter norms to protect against a non-issue.
blaser-waffle 6y ago
This is a professional engineering / IT / white-collar crowd -- most people posting on HN write a lot of emails and expect a level of professionalism. Honestly, that's what keeps the quality of the site high. Compare that to reddit, where I've seen multiple responses that were literally just "bruh"

by dilap 6y ago

throwaway0a5e 6y ago

IMO it's more nuanced. If you're endorsing something the majority here likes you don't really have to care about tone as long as you're not being totally crazy. If you're trying to go against the grain then you need to chose your words very carefully. Edit: Of course the real world is like this too but I think there's a meaningful difference in the degree.

happytoexplain 6y ago
Frankly, I consider us lucky to have a place where it's only as bad as you've described, since at this point you're getting down to borderline unavoidable qualities of human communication. In most other communities, there are no carefully chosen words, and downvotes/disagreements are primarily petty, rather than attempts to address pettiness.
tutfbhuf 6y ago
Like in the real world.
- Loughla 6y ago
  Except it's not that simple - - the difference is that, in the real world, there are no scores associated with your negativity or 'going against the grain'. You can disagree in whatever manner you want, as long as you are oblivious to the obvious social cues of the people around you. Whereas on HN, there is a score to tell you that you've committed a social faux pas. It's more immediate, so it's a little easier to figure out. I've often thought about ways to integrate the scoring feature into real life to help folks on the spectrum learn to communicate with neurotypicals. Haven't squirreled that one out yet.
  - the_af 6y ago
    What's worse, with visual cues that you've commited a faux pas (the graying out), people are inclined to jump on the bandwagon. There is a subconscious temptation to pile on. In real life, you're not grayed-out for being contrary.
    - dwaltrip 6y ago
      I'm not sure if the graying out is the best approach. However, in real life, people may look at you funny, and if they do, others will notice this. Tangentially, the lack of body language feedback is a major reason people are such assholes online. It doesn't exactly feel like you are talking to a real person and you aren't getting realtime feedback, so it is harder to adjust to the other person or even just treat them reasonably.
      - the_af 6y ago
        Agreed. I find downvote visual cues such as the graying out a bit like laugh tracks in sitcoms. On their own, some people will find the jokes funny, some find them distasteful or unfunny -- add a laugh track and you're telling people how they must feel. Downvotes are a lot like that: "people find this comment distasteful, what are you going to do about that?".

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

jeffbee 6y ago

There is nothing wrong with the tone of Person1. Every aspect of their statement is true and correct, not exaggerated, and gives due respect to both the OP and the reader of the comment.

happytoexplain 6y ago
To provide you another point of view: I can not tell if they are being snarky/sarcastic, or if they are being literal.
dilap 6y ago
I agree, it's simply blunt. But if they had said something like, "I suspect this post is written by GPT-3. Consider X, Y, Z sentence -- these are typical constructions of GPT-3 because of A," it probably would not have been down-voted.
- jeffbee 6y ago
  I guess. That an asymmetrical expectation, though. If we require a great effort to politely point out that a blog is devoid of substance, the spammers win. It's also a very important skill these days to understand when you are being manipulated by the tone police into supporting an extreme position, or at least not denouncing it. It's super easy to lure some HNer into espousing an essentially eugenicist position on race and IQ, which weirdly is a topic that always makes it to the front page on HN, but then if you go on to denounce their position as eugenicist, you'll be flagged. I think that inevitably leads to decline in the quality of a community because if you don't have shorthand for "this is autogenerated spam", "this is climate denial", "this is a conspiracy theory", or "this is racist" then you'll instead waste all of your time trying to politely refute the bullshit point by point.
  - hackinthebochs 6y ago
    >If we require a great effort to politely point out that a blog is devoid of substance, the spammers win. But until spam becomes a problem on this site, it is premature to alter norms to protect against a non-issue.

blaser-waffle 6y ago

This is a professional engineering / IT / white-collar crowd -- most people posting on HN write a lot of emails and expect a level of professionalism. Honestly, that's what keeps the quality of the site high. Compare that to reddit, where I've seen multiple responses that were literally just "bruh"